I took a low D1 Nebraska rebuild, and I stacked classes a bit. My structure right now is 1-4-4-3.

That includes 1-3-1-1 guards and 0-1-3-2 bigs. Not ideal. And what's annoying, is these 6 bigs are all pretty similar in skill. There isn't anyone to clearly cut, anyone to clearly move to the 3, or any total stud that can carry my unit. 6 bigs in 3 years is ridiculous, and my 2 bigs in the lowest class can't be redshirted this year (one has already been redshirted and the other I promised a start).

Here's a rundown of the bigs on my roster:

Rising Junior (1):

Reichenberg (87 ath, 28 spd, 98 reb, 92 de, 84 blk, 59 lp, 1 per 29 bh, 24 pa, 92 sta, D+ FT)

Probably worst big on my roster, although the stamina makes him deceptively useful as a shutdown defender/rebounder. But the fact he's alone in his class makes me really unlikely to cut him.

Rising Sophomores (3):

Junior (80 ath, 53 spd, 100 reb, 100 de, 92 sb, 80 lp, 36 per, 45 bh, 50+ pa, 76-84 sta, C- FT)

Probably the 3rd best big on my roster. Not cutting this guy at C prestige. And probably shouldn't be playing the 3 right? Or can I get away with playing him at the 3 after he maxes on a S16/E8 Mo/Man team?

Huse (81 ath, 36 spd, 100 reb, 100 de, 99 sb, 60 lp, 41 per, 45 bh, 19 pa, 74 sta, D+ FT)

Maybe the guy I'm most likely to cut? Very similar to outland. 1 class ahead of him. But... he's pretty good. Would you rescind this at C prestige or play Landers at the 3?

Landers (82 ath, 68 spd, 96 reb, 100 de, 75 sb, 95 lp, 68 per, 54 bh, 40-52 pa, 76 sta, C FT)

How do you guys feel about sliding this guy to the 3 on a good team? He definitely has the speed, the BH/PA is just a little more sketchy.

Rising Freshman (2):

Outland (87 ath, 39 spd, 100 reb, 100 de, 93-100 sb, 55 lp, 42+ per, 47+ bh, 46+ pa, 87 sta, C FT)

No way in hell your rescind this over Huse right? Stud?

Hovis (85+ ath, 48-62 spd, 88-100 reb, 82+ de, 86 sb, 89-100 lp, 57 per, 36 bh, 40 pa, 73 sta, D+)

I know this is low stamina, lowish WE, but I was right to sign this even though he's my 6th big in 3 years right? No way you pass up a guy this dominant at C prestige right? Hopefully, I get good ath/de/lp growth.

I don't really see a reason to cut any of them. You already have a stud SF so I think Landers, Junior or Hovis (in that order) can all be a serviceable back up at the 3 in the beginning/middle stages of a rebuild. Landers, I would argue, is a pretty decent SF at his peak for this type of team but is better utilized as a PF.

It's not really the topic you raised but I do think one of the best ways to start a D1 rebuild is to load up on the front court guys that are 85+ in ATH/DEF/REB and little else. These guys (especially the ones around or just above 85) can generally be had for nothing and you can commit your recruiting resources to battling for higher end PG and wing positions. Most of your players look better than that but just a general thought on rebuilding.

I would see if you can sneak a redshirt on any of them to avoid carrying 6 bigs but doesnt seem like the end of the world if they say no (but I would expect Hovis to accept).

Posted by texashick on 10/20/2020 3:21:00 PM (view original):
I don't really see a reason to cut any of them. You already have a stud SF so I think Landers, Junior or Hovis (in that order) can all be a serviceable back up at the 3 in the beginning/middle stages of a rebuild. Landers, I would argue, is a pretty decent SF at his peak for this type of team but is better utilized as a PF.

It's not really the topic you raised but I do think one of the best ways to start a D1 rebuild is to load up on the front court guys that are 85+ in ATH/DEF/REB and little else. These guys (especially the ones around or just above 85) can generally be had for nothing and you can commit your recruiting resources to battling for higher end PG and wing positions. Most of your players look better than that but just a general thought on rebuilding.

I would see if you can sneak a redshirt on any of them to avoid carrying 6 bigs but doesnt seem like the end of the world if they say no (but I would expect Hovis to accept).

I agree with all of this. I personally think Landers is fine at 3, as long as you have good passing guards.

Posted by texashick on 10/20/2020 3:21:00 PM (view original):
I don't really see a reason to cut any of them. You already have a stud SF so I think Landers, Junior or Hovis (in that order) can all be a serviceable back up at the 3 in the beginning/middle stages of a rebuild. Landers, I would argue, is a pretty decent SF at his peak for this type of team but is better utilized as a PF.

It's not really the topic you raised but I do think one of the best ways to start a D1 rebuild is to load up on the front court guys that are 85+ in ATH/DEF/REB and little else. These guys (especially the ones around or just above 85) can generally be had for nothing and you can commit your recruiting resources to battling for higher end PG and wing positions. Most of your players look better than that but just a general thought on rebuilding.

I would see if you can sneak a redshirt on any of them to avoid carrying 6 bigs but doesnt seem like the end of the world if they say no (but I would expect Hovis to accept).

Hovis is promised start/minutes. I'll try to RS SO/JR

what is this rising juniors, rising sophmores stuff... dont you have 3 soph bigs? why is only 1/3 listed as a rising junior?

i don't really know what to say. you kind of lost me... for example all this talking about cutting. if those are their caps (a couple look suspect but i assume they are close-ish?), seems like a pretty clear no.

it probably goes without saying, but having 3 true bigs without sf potential in 1 class is terrible. take the walkon! if you do sign 3 - and again, don't - but maybe you have 2 open coin flips sign together or something - try real hard to be redshirting one. if you inform due to a wealth of cheap bigs that's fine, that doesn't count as a violation. but at least try not to have promises on all 3 so you have a chance, like on a lower rated guy who might take it. and definitely try all 3 of them soph year - but i get you made that a big hard signing 1-2 more :) but maybe redshirt one next year as a junior? it might even be worth it taking the 1 WE hit - leave him off your depth chart, and wait till the end of the year to redshirt, so you still get growth. but you have so many bigs you may just want to get rid of them. its always brutal having 3 bigs graduate together though, i'd go for the redshirt now that you redshirted one of the fr. especially because landers can count for sf. you really have 0 true bigs in that class now, you got to even it out. i think that is the play.

reichenberg - i dont know what you mean, worst big on your roster, you lost me there too. the guy is great, what is he like 88 ath, 96 reb, 93 def, 90s sta or so next year? he was already good this year, clearly the best of the 3 - even if their caps might eventually make them better. i might i feel like he can compete on any team... c prestige, hes really good. yeah hes a pure reb/def type, but for that role, he is great - having such good stamina (90s on a big!) while being able to do two things really well, that is a really good player. i didn't see your cap projections until after i wrote most of this - i was thinking he might be your best big.

junior i agree, too good to cut. huse looks like hes 90 def or so cap? not sure how hard you pushed him... but i'm not seeing how you can cut a 81 ath, 95 reb, 88 def, 99 blk or so player next year. his stamina does suck though. i think you could redshirt huse pretty easily, go all out on sta/def next year (30 each) and then redshirt him at the end. he seems like the candidate - junior prob has more growth you want senior year. you could do reichenberg too - you prob suck next year and hes really good, so hes a good one to save for later, when you will have a good team. having him an extra year would be huge. maybe he'll only drop -50 we? i might not even try it up front to be honest, hes so unlikely to take, and the 2nd redshirt he'd be 1 we for sure. [note after i saw the projections - if reichenberg is the only one who will basically be maxed out next year, then hes probably the best one to take the WE hit on, and the stamina drop on the other guys coud be devastating]

landers is interesting. i think he makes a good sf and you should just consider him one - why do you say there is no clear guy to slide over? he feels like an easy one to slide over, consider him a sf for now and maybe slide him on back to pf later if it makes sense. his passing sucks and that isn't super pleasant but its easily tolerated with his awesome reb, def, and offense skills. his ath/blk being weaker and spd/def being stronger, relative to a sf/pf, makes him make more sense defensively at the 3 anyway.

Posted by gillispie1 on 10/20/2020 10:19:00 PM (view original):
what is this rising juniors, rising sophmores stuff... dont you have 3 soph bigs? why is only 1/3 listed as a rising junior?

Junior/Huse are inels.

appear to be rising junior, are actually rising sophs

oh... ok never mind lol. i am kinda fried, sorry about that, yeah i was totally confused. that definitely makes huse and junior better than i thought. so even more no way to cut them - but doesn't that mean you are fine? landers -> SF, then you have a really good reb core of 2 bigs and a sf in your soph class? obviously wouldn't want to redshirt your junior anymore - and you can't on the 2 soph true bigs - so i don't really think you are redshirting anyone. you could try hovis next year though.

overall i think these guys are really good for c prestige and while its definitely a bit much on the bigs, i think its a good problem to have. outland is going to suck for a while anyway.

Posted by gillispie1 on 10/20/2020 10:56:00 PM (view original):
i don't really know what to say. you kind of lost me... for example all this talking about cutting. if those are their caps (a couple look suspect but i assume they are close-ish?), seems like a pretty clear no.

it probably goes without saying, but having 3 true bigs without sf potential in 1 class is terrible. take the walkon! if you do sign 3 - and again, don't - but maybe you have 2 open coin flips sign together or something - try real hard to be redshirting one. if you inform due to a wealth of cheap bigs that's fine, that doesn't count as a violation. but at least try not to have promises on all 3 so you have a chance, like on a lower rated guy who might take it. and definitely try all 3 of them soph year - but i get you made that a big hard signing 1-2 more :) but maybe redshirt one next year as a junior? it might even be worth it taking the 1 WE hit - leave him off your depth chart, and wait till the end of the year to redshirt, so you still get growth. but you have so many bigs you may just want to get rid of them. its always brutal having 3 bigs graduate together though, i'd go for the redshirt now that you redshirted one of the fr. especially because landers can count for sf. you really have 0 true bigs in that class now, you got to even it out. i think that is the play.

reichenberg - i dont know what you mean, worst big on your roster, you lost me there too. the guy is great, what is he like 88 ath, 96 reb, 93 def, 90s sta or so next year? he was already good this year, clearly the best of the 3 - even if their caps might eventually make them better. i might i feel like he can compete on any team... c prestige, hes really good. yeah hes a pure reb/def type, but for that role, he is great - having such good stamina (90s on a big!) while being able to do two things really well, that is a really good player. i didn't see your cap projections until after i wrote most of this - i was thinking he might be your best big.

junior i agree, too good to cut. huse looks like hes 90 def or so cap? not sure how hard you pushed him... but i'm not seeing how you can cut a 81 ath, 95 reb, 88 def, 99 blk or so player next year. his stamina does suck though. i think you could redshirt huse pretty easily, go all out on sta/def next year (30 each) and then redshirt him at the end. he seems like the candidate - junior prob has more growth you want senior year. you could do reichenberg too - you prob suck next year and hes really good, so hes a good one to save for later, when you will have a good team. having him an extra year would be huge. maybe he'll only drop -50 we? i might not even try it up front to be honest, hes so unlikely to take, and the 2nd redshirt he'd be 1 we for sure. [note after i saw the projections - if reichenberg is the only one who will basically be maxed out next year, then hes probably the best one to take the WE hit on, and the stamina drop on the other guys coud be devastating]

landers is interesting. i think he makes a good sf and you should just consider him one - why do you say there is no clear guy to slide over? he feels like an easy one to slide over, consider him a sf for now and maybe slide him on back to pf later if it makes sense. his passing sucks and that isn't super pleasant but its easily tolerated with his awesome reb, def, and offense skills. his ath/blk being weaker and spd/def being stronger, relative to a sf/pf, makes him make more sense defensively at the 3 anyway.

I like Landers at the 3 as well. Will give us insane rebounding front line. Reichenberg has the worst caps of the guys right... or do you like Huse less them him? That stamina is nice, he's great 5-star repellant. His current ratings are the best on my roster for sure, although. Huse should be 99-100 de, I forgot. 78 blue de.

I should have a pretty good team next year right? And this is an important year for the program....I need to recruit 4 guys with whatever prestige I end up with after next year. I'm losing 0 guys from a team that beat the national champion after all...Toner is a monster, Kearney/Hammons is a great pair at the 1-2 by the postseason, Reichenberg is nice, and Landers will actually be developed by SO postseason... he might pass Junior/Huse. And we'll be super deep with Quiroz/Pringle off the bench for only having 1 senior and 5 upperclassmen.

But yeah, I'll keep Huse and think of Landers as a 3.

Posted by gillispie1 on 10/20/2020 11:11:00 PM (view original):
oh... ok never mind lol. i am kinda fried, sorry about that, yeah i was totally confused. that definitely makes huse and junior better than i thought. so even more no way to cut them - but doesn't that mean you are fine? landers -> SF, then you have a really good reb core of 2 bigs and a sf in your soph class? obviously wouldn't want to redshirt your junior anymore - and you can't on the 2 soph true bigs - so i don't really think you are redshirting anyone. you could try hovis next year though.

overall i think these guys are really good for c prestige and while its definitely a bit much on the bigs, i think its a good problem to have. outland is going to suck for a while anyway.

At least I got the redshirt on Outland, which is really nice. Even if he's unusable for year 1 and year 2 I'll still get 3 nice years out of him.

Even with Landers as a 3.. I still have 5 bigs in 3 years. Is the solution of this to mostly bench Outland/Hovis until their JR year basically? Huse/Reich/JUnior can cover most 4/5 minutes in my slowdown scheme. Hovis/OUtland can rotate based on matchups to pitch in 10 miunutes.

I have 3 shooters (95-100 PER) in my rising JR class... and none in my rising FR/SO classes. And I only have 1 opening next year. I need to land a shooter next year to contribute off the bench as a SO, so it's kinda risky to try to go 1 for 1 on that IMO. So I *could* rescind Outland.